CC MIN 2013-09-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Tom Brouchord used to be the lot owner and supports the Plan. He said that the owners of Laurei Way seem like nice people, but the land doesn't belong to them, but to other peopie. The lots are buildable by law. James Lee Han grew up close to Laurel Way and supports save Laurel Way's appeal and deny Joint Venture's Group. He has concerns that the staff recommendation was to develop lots in a holistic way - together, but that made him feel that the lot owners can develop on a case by case basis which seems to be contrary to the prior statement. Mr. Hahn said that based on the geology and people who live there, he has concerns with public safety and environmental concerns for that area. M/S Gee/Ira to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. Council then took a break at 9:40 p.m. and resumed at 9:50 p.m. Planning Manager Lyon provided some clarifying remarks regarding the stormwater requirements in Article 32 of the Zoning Section of the Municipal Code. He addressed the questions the appellants raised regarding the roadway and culvert of the protection water course. He provided details on this issue and the flood condition issue and the health and safety component. One Council Member brought up several issues: the issue of slope density requirements and asked if the City is in violation of the City's own Zoning requirements; merging smaller lots and was told that the County was doing this; and the status of a possible hillside ordinance. Planning Manager Lyon answered by stating that through Article 33 of the Zoning Ordinance, this ordinance gives the City opportunity to develop on nonconforming existing lots and legally creates lots consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. Thus, the City is not in violation. With regards to combining smaller lots, it is the City's discretion and it can require those of the property owners but are not required to mandate it. Lastly, with the draft hillside ordinance proposal which went to the Planning Commission on October 18, 2011 Mr. Lyon stated that there was clear opposition to this approach and this was specifically done for Residential Housing Zoning. Instead, the City looked at residential design guidelines and overall context and scope. Since then, this approach is still in draft form due to the loss of the Redevelopment Agency, reduction of staff, priorities shifted, and change of philosophy. City Manager Bell added that in the beginning this was a larger task than expected, because of the various zoning designations throughout the City. Furthermore, priorities had shifted and Dr. Bell said that Staff will bring this matter to the Planning Commission in the future but it is questionable how it would relate to this project before Council tonight. The same Council Member also asked about what would happen if the Council upheld the appeal and not developed and would it reduce or increase the value of a property. Moreover, he wanted to know if this would put the City in a precarious position. The CITY COUNCIL September 23, 2013 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 11 MINUTE BOOK NO. 64 Page No. 446